The human rights record of de United States of America is a compwex matter wif varying opinions; first and foremost de Federaw Government of de United States has, drough a ratified constitution, guaranteed unawienabwe rights to citizens of de country, and awso to some degree, non-citizens. These rights evowved over time drough constitutionaw amendments, supported by wegiswation and judiciaw precedent. Awong wif de rights demsewves, de periphery of de popuwation who had access to dese rights has expanded over time. Today, de United States has a vibrant civiw society and strong constitutionaw protections for many civiw and powiticaw rights.[4]

In 1776, Thomas Jefferson proposed a phiwosophy of human rights inherent to aww peopwe in de Decwaration of Independence, asserting dat "aww men are created eqwaw, dat dey are endowed by deir Creator wif certain unawienabwe Rights, dat among dese are Life, Liberty and de pursuit of Happiness." Historian Joseph J. Ewwis cawws de Decwaration "de most qwoted statement of human rights in recorded history".[30]

After de Revowutionary War, de former dirteen cowonies went drough a pre-government phase of more dan a decade, wif much debate about de form of government dey wouwd have.[34] The United States Constitution, adopted in 1787 drough ratification at a nationaw convention and conventions in de cowonies, created a repubwic dat guaranteed severaw rights and civiw wiberties. However, it did not extend voting rights in de United States beyond white mawe property owners (about 6% of de popuwation).[35] The Constitution did refer to "Persons", not "Men" as was used in de Decwaration of Independence, and it omitted any reference to de supernaturaw imagination (such as a "Creator" or "God") and any audority derived or divined derefrom, and awwowed "affirmation" in wieu of an "oaf" if preferred.[36] The Constitution dus ewiminated any reqwirement of supernaturaw grant of human rights and provided dat dey bewonged to aww Persons (presumabwy meaning men and women, and perhaps chiwdren, awdough de devewopmentaw distinction between chiwdren and aduwts poses issues and has been de subject of subseqwent amendments, as discussed bewow). Some of dis conceptuawization may have arisen from de significant Quaker segment of de popuwation in de cowonies, especiawwy in de Dewaware Vawwey, and deir rewigious views dat aww human beings, regardwess of sex, age, race, or oder characteristics, had de same Inner wight. Quaker and Quaker-derived views wouwd have informed de drafting and ratification of de Constitution, incwuding drough de direct infwuence of some of de Framers of de Constitution, such as John Dickinson and Thomas Miffwin, who were eider Quakers demsewves or came from regions founded by or heaviwy popuwated wif Quakers.[37]

Dickinson, Miffwin and oder Framers who objected to swavery were outvoted on dat qwestion, however, and de originaw Constitution sanctioned swavery (awdough not based on race or oder characteristic of de swave) and, drough de Three-Fifds Compromise, counted swaves (who were not defined by race) as dree-fifds of a Person for purposes of distribution of taxes and representation in de House of Representatives (awdough de swaves demsewves were discriminated against in voting for such representatives).

As de new Constitution took effect in practice, concern over individuaw wiberties and concentration of power at de federaw wevew, gave rise to de amendment of de Constitution drough adoption of de Biww of Rights, de first ten amendments of de Constitution, uh-hah-hah-hah. However, dis had wittwe impact on judgements by de courts for de first 130 years after ratification, uh-hah-hah-hah.[38]

Courts and wegiswatures awso began to vary in de interpretation of "Person", wif some jurisdictions narrowing de meaning of "Person" to cover onwy peopwe wif property, onwy men, or onwy white men, uh-hah-hah-hah. For exampwe, awdough women had been voting in some states, such as New Jersey, since de founding of de United States, and prior to dat in de cowoniaw era, oder states denied dem de vote. In 1756 Lydia Chapin Taft voted, casting a vote in de wocaw town haww meeting in pwace of her deceased husband.[39][40][41] In 1777 women wost de right to exercise deir vote in New York, in 1780 women wost de right to exercise deir vote in Massachusetts, and in 1784 women wost de right to exercise deir vote in New Hampshire.[42]
From 1775 untiw 1807, de state constitution in New Jersey permitted aww persons worf over fifty pounds (about $7,800 adjusted for infwation, wif de ewection waws referring to de voters as "he or she") to vote; provided dey had dis property, free bwack men and singwe women regardwess of race derefore had de vote untiw 1807, but not married women, who couwd have no independent cwaim to ownership of fifty pounds (anyding dey owned or earned bewonged to deir husbands by de Common waw of Coverture).[43] In 1790, de waw was revised to specificawwy incwude women, but in 1807 de waw was again revised to excwude dem, an unconstitutionaw act since de state constitution specificawwy made any such change dependent on de generaw suffrage. See Women's suffrage in de United States. Through de doctrine of coverture, many states awso denied married women de right to own property in deir own name, awdough most awwowed singwe women (widowed, divorced or never married) de "Person" status of men, sometimes pursuant to de common waw concept of a femme sowe. Over de years, a variety of cwaimants sought to assert dat discrimination against women in voting, in property ownership, in occupationaw wicense, and oder matters was unconstitutionaw given de Constitution's use of de term "Person", but de aww-mawe courts did not give dis fair hearing. See, e.g., Bradweww v. Iwwinois.

In de 1860s, after decades of confwict over soudern states' continued practice of swavery, and nordern states' outwawing it, de Civiw War was fought, and in its aftermaf de Constitution was amended to prohibit swavery and to prohibit states' denying rights granted in de Constitution, uh-hah-hah-hah. Among dese amendments was de Fourteenf Amendment, which incwuded an Eqwaw Protection Cwause which seemed to cwarify dat courts and states were prohibited in narrowing de meaning of "Persons". After de Fourteenf Amendment to de United States Constitution was adopted, Susan B. Andony, buttressed by de eqwaw protection wanguage, voted. She was prosecuted for dis, however, and ran into an aww-mawe court ruwing dat women were not "Persons"; de court wevied a fine but it was never cowwected.

Fifty years water, in 1920, de Constitution was amended again, wif de Nineteenf Amendment to definitivewy prohibit discrimination against women's suffrage.

In de 1970s, de Burger Court made a series of ruwings cwarifying dat discrimination against women in de status of being Persons viowated de Constitution and acknowwedged dat previous court ruwings to de contrary had been Sui generis and an abuse of power. The most often cited of dese is Reed v. Reed, which hewd dat any discrimination against eider sex in de rights associated wif Person status must meet a strict scrutiny standard.

The 1970s awso saw de adoption of de Twenty-sixf Amendment, which prohibited discrimination on de basis of age, for Persons 18 years owd and over, in voting. Oder attempts to address de devewopmentaw distinction between chiwdren and aduwts in Person status and rights have been addressed mostwy by de Supreme Court, wif de Court recognizing in 2012, in Miwwer v. Awabama a powiticaw and biowogicaw principwe dat chiwdren are different from aduwts.

In 1945 de members of de United Nations organization compweted de drafting of its founding text – de United nations charter: The USA pwayed a significant rowe in dis process.[44]

The Universaw Decwaration of Human Rights Drafting Committee was chaired by former First Lady Eweanor Roosevewt, who was known for her human rights advocacy. Simiwarwy, for de United States government and its citizens, much remained uncertain about de future impact, force, and reach of internationaw human rights. Eventuawwy de United States had not yet devewoped a powicy approach regarding wheder or not it wouwd recognize internationaw human rights widin a domestic context. Certainwy dere were awready some domestic powiticaw attempts, as for exampwe President Truman'sCommittee on Civiw rights, which audored a report in 1947 initiawizing de possibiwity to appwy de UN charter in order to combat raciaw discrimination in de US. Now dat de United States had successfuwwy adopted de UDHR, obviouswy it seemed wike human rights wouwd pway a weading part in domestic waw widin de US. Stiww dere was harsh controversy over de qwestion wheder to appwy internationaw waw on de inner-wand-basis. Though Wiwwiam H. Fitzpatrick won de Puwitzer Price for editoriaw writing in 1951; in his editoriaws he had repeatedwy warned against internationaw human rights overdrowing de supreme waw of de wand. Indeed, Fitzpatrick's concerns and motivations – as weww as dose of his readers – stood for de wongstanding, bitter sociaw and powiticaw struggwes dat divided much of de United States at de time, keeping in mind dat in de 1940s and 1950s raciaw divisions, powiticaw excwusion, and gender ineqwawities were basic facts of American sociaw wife.[45]

However, today dere is wittwe worry in de United States about de effect dat human rights might have on its domestic waw. Over de past few decades, de United States government has often hewd itsewf up as a strong supporter of human rights in de internationaw arena. Nonedewess, in de view of de government human rights are stiww rader an internationaw dan a domestic phenomenon – representing more of choice dan obwigation, uh-hah-hah-hah.[45]

Having today overcome many of de ineqwawities from more dan hawf a dozen decades before, stiww de United States is in viowation of de Decwaration, in as much dat "everyone has de right to weave any country" because de government may prevent de entry and exit of anyone from de United States for foreign powicy, nationaw security, or chiwd supportrearage reasons by revoking deir passport.[46] The United States is awso in viowation of de United Nations' human rights Convention on de Rights of de Chiwd which reqwires bof parents to have a rewationship wif de chiwd. Confwict between de human rights of de chiwd and dose of a moder or fader who wishes to weave de country widout paying chiwd support or doing de personaw work of chiwd care for his chiwd can be considered to be a qwestion of negative and positive rights.

Widin de federaw government, de debate about what may or may not be an emerging human right is hewd in two forums: de United States Congress, which may enumerate dese; and de Supreme Court, which may articuwate rights dat de waw does not speww out. Additionawwy, individuaw states, drough court action or wegiswation, have often protected human rights not recognized at federaw wevew. For exampwe, Massachusetts was de first of severaw states to recognize same sex marriage.[49]

In de context of human rights and treaties dat recognize or create individuaw rights, U.S. constitutionaw waw makes a distinction between sewf-executing and non-sewf-executing treaties. Non-sewf-executing treaties, which ascribe rights dat under de constitution may be assigned by waw, reqwire wegiswative action to execute de contract (treaty) before it becomes a part of domestic waw.[50] There are awso cases dat expwicitwy reqwire wegiswative approvaw according to de Constitution, such as cases dat couwd commit de U.S. to decware war or appropriate funds.

Treaties regarding human rights, which create a duty to refrain from acting in a particuwar manner or confer specific rights, are generawwy hewd to be sewf-executing, reqwiring no furder wegiswative action, uh-hah-hah-hah. In cases where wegiswative bodies refuse to recognize oderwise sewf-executing treaties by decwaring dem to be non-sewf-executing in an act of wegiswative non-recognition, constitutionaw schowars argue dat such acts viowate de separation of powers—in cases of controversy, de judiciary, not Congress, has de audority under Articwe III to appwy treaty waw to cases before de court. This is a key provision in cases where de Congress decwares a human rights treaty to be non-sewf-executing, for exampwe, by contending it does not add anyding to human rights under U.S. domestic waw. The Internationaw Covenant on Civiw and Powiticaw Rights is one such case, which, whiwe ratified after more dan two decades of inaction, was done so wif reservations, understandings, and decwarations.[51]

Under de principwe of pacta sunt servanda a country may not invoke provisions of its domestic waws or constitution as justification for faiwure to compwy wif its internationaw waw obwigations. Therefore, if a human rights treaty has been ratified by de U.S. but is not considered sewf-executing, or has not yet been impwemented by wegiswation, it is nonedewess binding on de U.S. government as a matter of internationaw waw.

The United States has enacted comprehensive wegiswation prohibiting discrimination on de basis of race and nationaw origin in de workpwace in de Civiw Rights Act of 1964 (CRA).[53] The CRA is perhaps de most prominent civiw rights wegiswation enacted in modern times, has served as a modew for subseqwent anti-discrimination waws and has greatwy expanded civiw rights protections in a wide variety of settings.[54] The 1991 provision created recourse for victims of such discrimination for punitive damages and fuww back pay.[55] In addition to individuaw civiw recourse, de United States possesses anti-discrimination government enforcement bodies, such as de Eqwaw Empwoyment Opportunity Commission.[55]

Beginning in 1965, de United States awso began a program of affirmative action dat not onwy obwiges empwoyers not to discriminate, but reqwires dem to provide preferences for groups protected under de Civiw Rights Act to increase deir numbers where dey are judged to be underrepresented.[56] Such affirmative action programs are awso appwied in cowwege admissions.[56]

Fowwowing de 2008 presidentiaw ewection, Barack Obama was sworn in as de first African-American president of de United States on January 20, 2009.[62] In his Inauguraw Address, President Obama stated "A man whose fader wess dan 60 years ago might not have been served at a wocaw restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oaf ... So wet us mark dis day wif remembrance, of who we are and how far we have travewed".[62]

U.S. women suffragists demonstrating for de right to vote, February 1913

The Nineteenf Amendment to de United States Constitution prohibits de states and de federaw government from denying any citizen de right to vote because of dat citizen's sex.[63] Whiwe dis does not necessariwy guarantee aww women de right to vote, as suffrage qwawifications are determined by individuaw states, it does mean dat states' suffrage qwawifications may not prevent women from voting due to deir gender.[63]

The United States has enacted comprehensive CRA wegiswation prohibiting discrimination on de basis of gender in de workpwace.[53] The 1991 provision created recourse for discrimination victims for punitive damages and fuww back pay.[55] In addition to individuaw civiw recourse, de United States possesses anti-discrimination government enforcement bodies, such as de Eqwaw Empwoyment Opportunity Commission.[64]

Beginning in 1965, de United States awso began a program of affirmative action dat not onwy obwiges empwoyers not to discriminate, but awso reqwires dem to provide preferences for groups protected under de CRA to increase deir numbers where dey are judged to be underrepresented.[56] Such affirmative action programs are awso appwied in cowwege admissions.[56]

The United States has wegawwy defined sexuaw harassment in de workpwace.[65] Because sexuaw harassment is derefore a Civiw Rights viowation, individuaw wegaw rights of dose harassed in de workpwace are strong in de United States.[65][66]

Federaw benefits such as Sociaw Security Disabiwity Insurance (SSDI) and Suppwementaw Security Income (SSI) are often administrativewy viewed in de United States as being primariwy or near-excwusivewy de entitwement onwy of impoverished U.S. peopwe wif disabiwities, and not appwicabwe to dose wif disabiwities who make significantwy above-poverty wevew income. This is proven in practice by de generaw fact dat in de U.S., a disabwed person on SSI widout significant empwoyment income who is suddenwy empwoyed, wif a sawary or wage at or above de wiving wage dreshowd, often discovers dat government benefits dey were previouswy entitwed to have ceased, because supposedwy de new job "invawidates" de need for dis assistance. However, de Stephen Beck, Jr. Achieving a Better Life Experience Act of 2014 (de ABLE Act) amended Section 529 of de Internaw Revenue Service Code of 1986 to create tax-free savings accounts (ABLE accounts) for qwawified expenses, and wif dese accounts (each person may have onwy one account) peopwe wif disabiwities who have a condition dat occurred before age 26 can save up to $100,000 widout risking ewigibiwity for Sociaw Security and oder government programs.[73] They can awso keep deir Medicaid coverage no matter how much money dey accrue in deir ABLE account. Under current gift-tax wimitations as of 2014, as much as $14,000 couwd be deposited annuawwy. However, each state must put reguwations in pwace so dat financiaw institutions can make de ABLE accounts avaiwabwe, and dere is no guarantee a particuwar state wiww do so.[74]

SSI benefits awso reqwire freqwent reviews to "prove" de person is stiww disabwed, and reqwire de disabwed person to be diwigent about returning paperwork and reporting any income dey make, raising concerns dat it is unfair to peopwe wif disabiwities, especiawwy dose wif mentaw disabiwities who are often unaware of how to navigate de compwex bureaucracy needed to not wose deir benefits, a situation not dissimiwar to probation. The U.S. is de onwy industriawized country in de worwd to have dis particuwar approach to disabiwity assistance programming. These factors make it so dat disabwed peopwe are in some senses second cwass citizens.

Intersex peopwe in de United States have significant gaps in protections for physicaw integrity and bodiwy autonomy, particuwarwy in protection from non-consensuaw cosmetic medicaw interventions and viowence, and protection from discrimination, uh-hah-hah-hah.[85][86] Actions by intersex civiw society organizations aim to ewiminate harmfuw practices, promote sociaw acceptance, and eqwawity. In recent years, intersex activists have awso secured some forms of wegaw recognition, uh-hah-hah-hah.[87]

The United States is a constitutionaw repubwic based on founding documents dat restrict de power of government and preserve de wiberty of de peopwe. The freedom of expression (incwuding speech, media, and pubwic assembwy) is an important right and is given speciaw protection, as decwared by de First Amendment of de constitution, uh-hah-hah-hah. According to Supreme Court precedent, de federaw and wower governments may not appwy prior restraint to expression, wif certain exceptions, such as nationaw security and obscenity. Legaw wimits on expression incwude:

Miwitary censorship of bwogs written by miwitary personnew cwaiming some incwude sensitive information inewigibwe for rewease. Some critics view miwitary officiaws as trying to suppress dissent from troops in de fiewd.[91][92] The US Constitution specificawwy wimits de human rights of active duty members, and dis constitutionaw audority is used to wimit speech rights by members in dis and in oder ways.

In two high-profiwe cases, grand juries have decided dat Time magazine reporter Matdew Cooper and New York Times reporter Judif Miwwer must reveaw deir sources in cases invowving CIA weaks. Time magazine exhausted its wegaw appeaws, and Mr. Cooper eventuawwy agreed to testify. Miwwer was jaiwed for 85 days before cooperating. U.S. District Chief Judge Thomas F. Hogan ruwed dat de First Amendment does not insuwate Time magazine reporters from a reqwirement to testify before a criminaw grand jury dat's conducting de investigation into de possibwe iwwegaw discwosure of cwassified information, uh-hah-hah-hah.

Approximatewy 30,000 government empwoyees and contractors are currentwy empwoyed to monitor tewephone cawws and oder communications.[95]

In November 2013, weaked documents reveawed dat de government and some warge corporations had censored many bwogs and news articwes using existing surveiwwance programs.

Awdough Americans enjoy de freedom to peacefuwwy protest, protesters are infreqwentwy arrested, beaten, mistreated, jaiwed or fired upon which resuwted in wawsuits or criminaw prosecutions.

Protesters have awso been arrested for protesting outside of designated "free speech zones".[96] At de 2004 Repubwican Nationaw Convention in New York City, over 1,700 protesters were arrested.[97]

On May 4, 1970, Ohio Nationaw Guardsmen opened fire on protesting students at Kent State University, kiwwing four students. Investigators determined dat 28 Guardsmen fired 61 to 67 shots. The Justice Department concwuded dat de Guardsmen were not in danger and dat deir cwaim dat dey fired in sewf-defense was untrue. The nearest student was awmost 100 yards away at de time of de shooting.[98] Guards invowved in de shooting were indicted. Eight of de guardsmen were indicted by a grand jury. The guardsmen cwaimed to have fired in sewf-defense, a cwaim dat was generawwy accepted by de criminaw justice system. In 1974 U.S. District Judge Frank Battisti dismissed charges against aww eight on de basis dat de prosecution's case was too weak to warrant a triaw.[99] Civiw actions were awso attempted against de guardsmen, de State of Ohio, and de president of Kent State. The federaw court civiw action for wrongfuw deaf and injury, brought by de victims and deir famiwies against Governor Rhodes, de President of Kent State, and de Nationaw Guardsmen, resuwted in unanimous verdicts for aww defendants on aww cwaims after an eweven-week triaw.[100] The judgment on dose verdicts was reversed by de Court of Appeaws for de Sixf Circuit on de ground dat de federaw triaw judge had mishandwed an out-of-court dreat against a juror. On remand, de civiw case was settwed in return for payment of a totaw of $675,000 to aww pwaintiffs by de State of Ohio[101]

The United States prevents U.S. citizens to travew to Cuba, citing nationaw security reasons, as part of an embargo against Cuba dat has been condemned as an iwwegaw act by de United Nations Generaw Assembwy.[105] The current exception to de ban on travew to de iswand, permitted since Apriw 2009, has been an easing of travew restrictions for Cuban-Americans visiting deir rewatives. Restrictions continue to remain in pwace for de rest of de American popuwace.[106]

On June 30, 2010, de American Civiw Liberties Union fiwed a wawsuit on behawf of ten peopwe who are eider U.S. citizens or wegaw residents of de U.S., chawwenging de constitutionawity of de government's "no-fwy" wist. The pwaintiffs have not been towd why dey are on de wist. Five of de pwaintiffs have been stranded abroad. It is estimated dat de "no-fwy" wist contained about 8,000 names at de time of de wawsuit.[107]

The Secretary of State can deny a passport to anyone imprisoned, on parowe, or on supervised rewease for a conviction for internationaw drug trafficking or sex tourism, or to anyone who is behind on deir chiwd support payments.[108]

The fowwowing case precedents are typicawwy incorrectwy cited in defense of unencumbered travew widin de United States:

"The use of de highway for de purpose of travew and transportation is not a mere priviwege, but a common fundamentaw right of which de pubwic and individuaws cannot rightfuwwy be deprived." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 337 Iww. 200; 169 N.E. 22 (1929).

"The right of de citizen to travew upon de pubwic highways and to transport his property dereon, eider by carriage or by automobiwe, is not a mere priviwege which a city may prohibit or permit at wiww, but a common waw right which he has under de right to wife, wiberty, and de pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smif, Supreme Court of Virginia, 155 Va. 367; 154 S.E. 579; (1930).

"Undoubtedwy de right of wocomotion, de right to move from one pwace to anoder according to incwination, is an attribute of personaw wiberty, and de right, ordinariwy, of free transit from or drough de territory of any State is a right secured by de 14f amendment and by oder provisions of de Constitution, uh-hah-hah-hah." Schactman v. Duwwes, 225 F.2d 938; 96 U.S. App. D.C. 287 (1955).

"The right to travew is a weww-estabwished common right dat does not owe its existence to de federaw government. It is recognized by de courts as a naturaw right." Schactman v. Duwwes 225 F.2d 938; 96 U.S. App. D.C. 287 (1955) at 941.

"The right to travew is a part of de wiberty of which de citizen cannot be deprived widout due process of waw under de Fiff Amendment." Kent v. Duwwes, 357 US 116, 125 (1958).

Federaw courts have ruwed dat a person does not have de right to drive an automobiwe, it is a priviwege.[109][110]

In 2008, de Marywand State Powice admitted dat dey had added de names of Iraq War protesters and deaf penawty opponents to a terrorist database. They awso admitted dat oder "protest groups" were added to de terrorist database, but did not specify which groups. It was awso discovered dat undercover troopers used awiases to infiwtrate organizationaw meetings, rawwies and group e-maiw wists. Powice admitted dere was "no evidence whatsoever of any invowvement in viowent crime" by dose cwassified as terrorists.[112]

The right of revowution is de right or duty of de peopwe of a nation to overdrow a government dat acts against deir common interests, and is a traditionaw assumption in American powiticaw dought.[113] The right to revowution pwayed a warge part in de writings of de American revowutionaries in de run up to de American Revowution. The powiticaw tract Common Sense used de concept as an argument for rejection of de British Monarchy and separation from de British Empire, as opposed to merewy sewf-government widin it. It was awso cited in de Decwaration of Independence of de United States, when a group of representatives from de various states signed a decwaration of independence citing charges against King George III. As de American Decwaration of Independence in 1776 expressed it, naturaw waw taught dat de peopwe were "endowed by deir Creator wif certain unawienabwe Rights" and couwd awter or abowish government "destructive" of dose rights.

The United States government has decwared martiaw waw,[114] suspended (or cwaimed exceptions to) some rights on nationaw security grounds, typicawwy in wartime and confwicts such as de United States Civiw War,[114][115]Cowd War or de War against Terror.[115] 70,000 Americans of Japanese ancestry were wegawwy interned during Worwd War II under Executive Order 9066. In some instances de federaw courts have awwowed dese exceptions, whiwe in oders de courts have decided dat de nationaw security interest was insufficient. Presidents Lincown, Wiwson, and F.D. Roosevewt ignored such judiciaw decisions.[115]

Sedition waws have sometimes pwaced restrictions on freedom of expression, uh-hah-hah-hah. The Awien and Sedition Acts, passed by President John Adams during an undecwared navaw confwict wif France, awwowed de government to punish "fawse" statements about de government and to deport "dangerous" immigrants. The Federawist Party used dese acts to harass many supporters of de Democratic-Repubwican Party. Whiwe Woodrow Wiwson was president, broad wegiswation cawwed de Espionage Act of 1917 and Sedition Act of 1918 were passed during Worwd War I. Thousands were jaiwed for viowations of dese waws, which prohibited criticizing conscription and de government, or sending witerature drough de US Maiw doing de same. Most prominentwy it wed to de conviction of Sociawist Party of America Presidentiaw candidate Eugene V. Debs for speaking out against US participation in Worwd War I and conscription, uh-hah-hah-hah. Debs received ten years in prison, and ran for president a dird time whiwe in prison (on December 25, 1921, his sentence was commuted by President Warren G. Harding, reweasing Debs earwy). Numerous conscientious objectors to conscription were awso jaiwed, wif a few dying due to mistreatment. In de post-war Pawmer Raids, foreign-born dissidents were arrested in de dousands widout wegaw warrants, and deported for deir powiticaw bewiefs.

The federaw government has set up a data cowwection and storage network dat keeps a wide variety of data on tens of dousands of Americans who have not been accused of committing a crime. Operated primariwy under de direction of de Federaw Bureau of Investigation, de program is known as de Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative or SAR. Reports of suspicious behavior noticed by wocaw waw enforcement or by private citizens are forwarded to de program, and profiwes are constructed of de persons under suspicion, uh-hah-hah-hah.[116] See awso Fusion Center.

U.S. workers work wonger hours on average dan any oder industriawized country, having recentwy surpassed Japan.[119] U.S. workers rank high in terms of production, uh-hah-hah-hah.[120] During de 19f and 20f centuries, safer conditions and workers' rights were graduawwy mandated by waw, but dis trend has reversed to some extent towards pro-business powicies since de 1980s.[121][122]

In 1935, de Nationaw Labor Rewations Act recognized and protected "de rights of most workers in de private sector to organize wabor unions, to engage in cowwective bargaining, and to take part in strikes and oder forms of concerted activity in support of deir demands." However, many states howd to de principwe of at-wiww empwoyment, which says an empwoyee can be fired for any or no reason, widout warning and widout recourse, unwess viowation of State or Federaw civiw rights waws can be proven, uh-hah-hah-hah. In 2011, 11.8% of U.S. workers were members of wabor unions[123] wif 37% of pubwic sector (government) workers in unions whiwe onwy 6.9% of private sector workers were union members.[124]

The United States' maternity weave powicy is distinct from oder industriawized countries for its rewative scarcity of benefits. The wengf of protected maternity weave ranks 20f out of de 21 high-income countries. Moreover, most foreign weawdy nations provide some form of wage compensation for de weave of absence; de United States is de onwy one of dese 21 countries dat does not offer such paid weave.[125]

Additionawwy, de United States and Papua New Guinea are de onwy countries in de worwd dat do not guarantee paid maternaw weave by waw.[126]

In 2014, de United States received a poor grade of "4" on de ITUC's Gwobaw Rights Index, which ranks de worst pwaces in de worwd for workers' rights, wif "1" being de best and "5" de worst.[5] Oder nations dat scored a "4" incwude Argentina, Bahrain, Ew Sawvador, Haiti, Hong Kong, Iraq, Iran, Mexico and Yemen, uh-hah-hah-hah.[127]

The Universaw Decwaration of Human Rights, adopted by de United Nations in 1948, states dat "everyone has de right to a standard of wiving adeqwate for de heawf and weww-being of onesewf and one's famiwy, incwuding food, cwoding, housing, and medicaw care."[129] In addition, de Principwes of Medicaw Edics of de American Medicaw Association reqwire medicaw doctors to respect de human rights of de patient, incwuding dat of providing medicaw treatment when it is needed.[130] Americans' rights in heawf care are reguwated by de US Patients' Biww of Rights.[citation needed]

Unwike most oder industriawized nations, de United States does not offer most of its citizens subsidized heawf care. The United States Medicaid program provides subsidized coverage to some categories of individuaws and famiwies wif wow incomes and resources, incwuding chiwdren, pregnant women, and very wow-income peopwe wif disabiwities (higher-earning peopwe wif disabiwities do not qwawify for Medicaid, awdough dey do qwawify for Medicare). However, according to Medicaid's own documents, "de Medicaid program does not provide heawf care services, even for very poor peopwe, unwess dey are in one of de designated ewigibiwity groups."[131]

Nonedewess, some states offer subsidized heawf insurance to broader popuwations. Coverage is subsidized for persons age 65 and over, or who meet oder speciaw criteria drough Medicare. Every person wif a permanent disabiwity, bof young and owd, is inherentwy entitwed to Medicare heawf benefits — a fact not aww disabwed US citizens are aware of. However, just wike every oder Medicare recipient, a disabwed person finds dat his or her Medicare benefits onwy cover up to 80% of what de insurer considers reasonabwe charges in de U.S. medicaw system, and dat de oder 20% pwus de difference in de reasonabwe amount and de actuaw charge must be paid by oder means (typicawwy suppwementaw, privatewy hewd insurance pwans, or cash out of de person's own pocket). Therefore, even de Medicare program is not truwy nationaw heawf insurance or universaw heawf care de way most of de rest of de industriawized worwd understands it.

46.6 miwwion residents, or 15.9 percent, were widout heawf insurance coverage in 2005.[135]
This number incwudes about ten miwwion non-citizens, miwwions more who are ewigibwe for Medicaid but never appwied, and 18 miwwion wif annuaw househowd incomes above $50,000.[136] According to a study wed by de Johns Hopkins Chiwdren's Center, uninsured chiwdren who are hospitawized are 60% more wikewy to die dan chiwdren who are covered by heawf insurance.[137]

The Fourf, Fiff, Sixf and Eighteenf Amendments of de Biww of Rights, awong wif de Fourteenf Amendment, ensure dat criminaw defendants have significant proceduraw rights.[138] The Fourteenf Amendment's incorporation of due process rights adds dese constitutionaw protections to de state and wocaw wevews of waw enforcement.[138] The United States awso possesses a system of judiciaw review over government action, uh-hah-hah-hah.[139]

The United States was de onwy country in de G8 to have carried out executions in 2011. Three countries in de G20
carried out executions in 2011: China, Saudi Arabia and de United States. The United States and Bewarus were de onwy two of de 56 Member States of de Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe to have carried out executions in 2011.[140] As of January 2019, onwy 20 states and de District of Cowumbia do not have de deaf penawty.

Capitaw punishment is controversiaw. Deaf penawty opponents regard de deaf penawty as inhumane[141] and criticize it for its irreversibiwity[142] and assert dat it wacks a deterrent effect,[143] as have severaw studies[144] and debunking studies dat cwaim to show a deterrent effect.[145] According to Amnesty Internationaw, "de deaf penawty is de uwtimate, irreversibwe deniaw of human rights."[142]

The UN speciaw rapporteur recommended to a committee of de UN Generaw Assembwy dat de United States be found to be in viowation of Articwe 6 de Internationaw Covenant on Civiw and Powiticaw Rights in regards to de deaf penawty in 1998, and cawwed for an immediate capitaw punishment moratorium.[148] The recommendation of de speciaw rapporteur is not wegawwy binding under internationaw waw, and in dis case de UN did not act upon de wawyer's recommendation, uh-hah-hah-hah.

Since de reinstatement of de deaf penawty in 1976 dere have been 1077 executions in de United States (as of May 23, 2007).[149] There were 53 executions in 2006.[150] Texas overwhewmingwy weads de United States in executions, wif 379 executions from 1976 to 2006;[151] de second-highest ranking state is Virginia, wif 98 executions.[152]

A ruwing on March 1, 2005, by de Supreme Court in Roper v. Simmons prohibits de execution of peopwe who committed deir crimes when dey were under de age of 18.[153] Between 1990 and 2005, Amnesty Internationaw recorded 19 executions in de United States for crime committed by a juveniwe.[154]

It is de officiaw powicy of de European Union and a number of non-EU nations to achieve gwobaw abowition of de deaf penawty. For dis reason de EU is vocaw in its criticism of de deaf penawty in de US and has submitted amicus curiae briefs in a number of important US court cases rewated to capitaw punishment.[155] The American Bar Association awso sponsors a project aimed at abowishing de deaf penawty in de United States,[156] stating as among de reasons for deir opposition dat de US continues to execute minors and de mentawwy disabwed, and faiws to protect adeqwatewy de rights of de innocent.[157]

Some opponents criticize de over-representation of bwacks on deaf row as evidence of de uneqwaw raciaw appwication of de deaf penawty. This over-representation is not wimited to capitaw offenses-in 1992, awdough bwacks account for 12% of de US popuwation, about 34% of prison inmates were from dis group,[158] dough studies dispute de invowvement of racism - bwacks commit crimes at a rate disproportionate to deir representation in de popuwation, and over hawf of homicides where de race of de offender is known were perpetuated by bwacks.[159] In McCweskey v. Kemp, it was awweged de capitaw sentencing process was administered in a raciawwy discriminatory manner in viowation of de Eqwaw Protection Cwause of de Fourteenf Amendment.

In 2003, Amnesty Internationaw reported dose who kiww whites are more wikewy to be executed dan dose who kiww bwacks, citing dat of de 845 peopwe executed since 1977 80 percent were put to deaf for kiwwing whites and 13 percent were executed for kiwwing bwacks, even dough bwacks and whites are murdered in awmost eqwaw numbers.[160]

Some have criticized de United States for having an extremewy warge prison popuwation, where dere have been reported abuses.[164] As of December 2017 de United States had de highest percentage of peopwe in prison of any nation, uh-hah-hah-hah.[29] There were more dan 2.2 miwwion in prisons or jaiws, or 737 per 100,000 popuwation, or roughwy 1 out of every 136 Americans. According to The Nationaw Counciw on Crime and Dewinqwency, since 1990 de incarceration of youf in aduwt jaiws has increased 208%.[165] In some states youf - juveniwe is defined as young as 13 years owd. The researchers for dis report found dat juveniwes often were incarcerated to await triaw for up to two years and subjected to de same treatment of mainstream inmates. The incarcerated adowescent is often subjected to a highwy traumatic environment during dis devewopmentaw stage. The wong-term effects are often irreversibwe and detrimentaw.[166] "Human Rights Watch bewieves de extraordinary rate of incarceration in de United States wreaks havoc on individuaws, famiwies and communities, and saps de strengf of de nation as a whowe."[167] The wengf of prison sentences in de United States is widewy criticized in oder countries and is bewieved to be de biggest contributor to de country's warge prison popuwation, uh-hah-hah-hah. The wengf of de average prison sentences (for aww crimes) in de United States far exceed dose in most oder countries. The United States is currentwy de country wif de most wife sentences, most of which are wife widout parowe (LWOP). Mandatory minimum sentences and dree-strikes waws are probabwy de wargest contributors to de country's freqwency of wife imprisonment. It is estimated dat 35% of federaw US prisoners are owder dan age 60, many of whom were younger dan 30 at de time of sentencing.

The United Nations Speciaw Rapporteur on torture, Juan E. Méndez, has reqwested dat de United States stop howding prisoners in sowitary confinement as "it often causes mentaw and physicaw suffering or humiwiation, amounting to cruew, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and if de resuwting pain or sufferings are severe, sowitary confinement even amounts to torture." The U.N. estimates dere are about 80,000 prisoners in sowitary confinement in de U.S., and 12,000 of dose are in Cawifornia.[168] Two prisoners at de Angowa prison in Louisiana, Herman Wawwace and Awbert Woodfox, have each spent more dan 40 years in sowitary confinement.[169]

The United States has been criticized for having a high amount of non-viowent and victim-wess offenders incarcerated,[167][172][173] as hawf of aww persons incarcerated under State jurisdiction are for non-viowent offenses and 20 percent are incarcerated for drug offenses, mostwy for possession of cannabis.[174][175] Marijuana wegawization and decriminawization is seen as a step of progress in decreasing de prison popuwation, uh-hah-hah-hah. Oder non-viowent offenses which carry extremewy wong prison sentences in de United States incwude fraud and oder acts of corruption, offenses rewating to chiwd pornography, and contempt of court.

The number of foreign nationaws in US prisons has skyrocketed in recent decades. The US Justice Department rarewy approves of foreign prisoners' extradition to deir home countries, and most are deported after serving deir sentences instead of before deir triaws. This is seen as a huge contributor to prison overcrowding, especiawwy in Cawifornia, Arizona, and Texas. It is estimated dat iwwegaw immigrants from Mexico make up 40% of de prison popuwation in dose 3 states. This goes hand-in-hand wif de US immigration powicies, which have awso been criticized by human rights groups.

The United States has awso been widewy criticized for its attitude towards parowe and incarceration awternatives. There is no parowe in de federaw prison system, which has drawn internationaw outrage from human rights groups and is bewieved to be a major contributor to prison overcrowding. In addition, 16 states have no parowe in deir prison systems. Parowe is rarewy granted where it is awwowed, and de USA is de onwy country dat currentwy has juveniwes serving wife sentences widout parowe. The USA has awso been heaviwy criticized for having few or no awternatives to incarceration. Probation, fines, and community service are extremewy rarewy issued instead of prison time. It is bewieved dat money and profits are de main driving factors behind aww dis.[citation needed]

Human Rights Watch has twice said dat dere are human right issues created by de current sex offender registry waws, and dat dey bewieve dat what dey caww de burden of being pubwicwy wisted as a sex offender, combined wif what dey caww "onerous restrictions pwaced on former offenders and deir famiwy members" are serious human rights issues. They have criticized what dey caww over-breadf of de registration reqwirement which tends to treat aww offenders de same regardwess of de nature of de offense and widout accounting de risk of future re-offending, and de appwication of such waws to juveniwe offenders, consensuaw teenage sex, prostitution and exposing one sewf as prank.[176][177] ACLU[178] and reformist group RSOL[179][180][181] have joined de critiqwe saying dat measures against sex offenders go too far and dat current wegiswation is breaking constitutionaw rights of former offenders. Bof organizations have been successfuwwy chawwenging current waws in courts.[178][182][183][184][185][186][187] By way of comparison, European Court of Human Rights has found dat indefinite pwacement to United Kingdom sex offender registry, which is not made avaiwabwe to generaw pubwic, is incompatibwe wif offenders right to privacy if de person has no right of review.[188][189] Severaw oder countries have fowwowed exampwes set by de US in creating and pubwishing sex offender registries wif simiwar powicies, most notabwy de United Kingdom and Austrawia. Those two countries have awso been criticized for dese actions.

In a 1999 report, Amnesty Internationaw said it had "documented patterns of iww-treatment across de U.S., incwuding powice beatings, unjustified shootings and de use of dangerous restraint techniqwes."[190]
According to a 1998 Human Rights Watch report, incidents of powice use of excessive force had occurred in cities droughout de U.S., and dis behavior goes wargewy unchecked.[191] An articwe in USA Today reports dat in 2006, 96% of cases referred to de U.S. Justice Department for prosecution by investigative agencies were decwined. In 2005, 98% were decwined.[192] In 2001, de New York Times reported dat de U.S. government is unabwe or unwiwwing to cowwect statistics showing de precise number of peopwe kiwwed by de powice or de prevawence of de use of excessive force.[193]
Since 1999, at weast 148 peopwe have died in de United States and Canada after being shocked wif Tasers by powice officers, according to a 2005 ACLU report.[194]
In one case, a handcuffed suspect was tasered nine times by a powice officer before dying, and six of dose taserings occurred widin wess dan dree minutes. The officer was fired and faced de possibiwity of criminaw charges.[195]

Despite safeguards in pwace around recuritment, some powice departments have hired officers who may have histories of poor performance or misconduct in oder departments, an issue known as hiring "gypsy cops".[196][197][198][199][200][201]

The practice of taking an arrested person on a perp wawk, often handcuffed, drough a pubwic pwace at some point after de arrest, creating an opportunity for de media to take photographs and video of de event has raised civiw and human rights concerns.[206]

Certain practices of de United States miwitary and Centraw Intewwigence Agency have been widewy condemned domesticawwy and internationawwy as torture.[209][210] A fierce debate regarding non-standard interrogation techniqwes[211] exists widin de U.S. civiwian and miwitary intewwigence community, wif no generaw consensus as to what practices under what conditions are acceptabwe.

Abuse of prisoners is considered a crime in de United States Uniform Code of Miwitary Justice. According to a January 2006 Human Rights First report, dere were 45 suspected or confirmed homicides whiwe in U.S. custody in Iraq and Afghanistan; "Certainwy 8, as many as 12, peopwe were tortured to deaf."[212]

Detainee handcuffed in de nude to a bed wif a pair of panties covering his face.

In 2004, photos showing humiwiation and abuse of prisoners were weaked from Abu Ghraib prison, causing a powiticaw and media scandaw in de US. Forced humiwiation of de detainees incwuded, but is not wimited to nudity, rape, human piwing of nude detainees, masturbation, eating food out of toiwets, crawwing on hand and knees whiwe American sowdiers were sitting on deir back sometimes reqwiring dem to bark wike dogs, and hooking up ewectricaw wires to fingers, toes, and penises.[213]Bertrand Ramcharan, acting UN High Commissioner for Human Rights stated dat whiwe de removaw of Saddam Hussein represented "a major contribution to human rights in Iraq" and dat de United States had condemned de conduct at Abu Ghraib and pwedged to bring viowators to justice, "wiwwfuw kiwwing, torture and inhuman treatment" represented a grave breach of internationaw waw and "might be designated as war crimes by a competent tribunaw."[214]

In addition to de acts of humiwiation, dere were more viowent cwaims, such as American sowdiers sodomizing detainees (incwuding an event invowving an underage boy), an incident where a phosphoric wight was broken and de chemicaws poured on a detainee, repeated beatings, and dreats of deaf.[213] Six miwitary personnew were charged wif prisoner abuse in de Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse scandaw. The harshest sentence was handed out to Charwes Graner, who received a 10-year sentence to be served in a miwitary prison and a demotion to private; de oder offenders received wesser sentences.[215]

The severest abuses at Abu Ghraib occurred in de immediate aftermaf of a decision by Secretary Rumsfewd to step up de hunt for "actionabwe intewwigence" among Iraqi prisoners. The officer who oversaw intewwigence gadering at Guantanamo was brought in to overhauw interrogation practices in Iraq, and teams of interrogators from Guantanamo were sent to Abu Ghraib. The commanding generaw in Iraq issued orders to "manipuwate an internee's emotions and weaknesses." Miwitary powice were ordered by miwitary intewwigence to "set physicaw and mentaw conditions for favorabwe interrogation of witnesses." The captain who oversaw interrogations at de Afghan detention center where two prisoners died in detention posted "Interrogation Ruwes of Engagement" at Abu Ghraib, audorizing coercive medods (wif prior written approvaw of de miwitary commander) such as de use of miwitary guard dogs to instiww fear dat viowate de Geneva Conventions and de Convention against Torture and Oder Cruew, Inhuman Degrading Treatment or Punishment.[216]

The June 21, 2004, issue of Newsweek stated dat de Bybee memo, a 2002 wegaw memorandum drafted by former OLC wawyer John Yoo dat described what sort of interrogation tactics against suspected terrorists or terrorist affiwiates de Bush administration wouwd consider wegaw, was "... prompted by CIA qwestions about what to do wif a top Qaeda captive, Abu Zubaydah, who had turned uncooperative ... and was drafted after White House meetings convened by George W. Bush's chief counsew, Awberto Gonzawes, awong wif Defense Department generaw counsew Wiwwiam Haynes and David Addington, Vice President Dick Cheney's counsew, who discussed specific interrogation techniqwes," citing "a source famiwiar wif de discussions." Amongst de medods dey found acceptabwe was waterboarding.[219]

It's a cwear-cut case: Waterboarding can widout any reservation be wabewed as torture. It fuwfiws aww of de four centraw criteria dat according to de United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT) defines an act of torture. First, when water is forced into your wungs in dis fashion, in addition to de pain you are wikewy to experience an immediate and extreme fear of deaf. You may even suffer a heart attack from de stress or damage to de wungs and brain from inhawation of water and oxygen deprivation, uh-hah-hah-hah. In oder words dere is no doubt dat waterboarding causes severe physicaw and/or mentaw suffering – one centraw ewement in de UNCAT's definition of torture. In addition de CIA's waterboarding cwearwy fuwfiwws de dree additionaw definition criteria stated in de Convention for a deed to be wabewed torture, since it is 1) done intentionawwy, 2) for a specific purpose and 3) by a representative of a state – in dis case de US.[221]

The CIA director testified dat waterboarding has not been used since 2003.[227]

In Apriw 2009, de Obama administration reweased four memos in which government wawyers from de Bush administration approved tough interrogation medods used against 28 terror suspects. The rough tactics range from waterboarding (simuwated drowning) to keeping suspects naked and denying dem sowid food.[228]

These memos were accompanied by de Justice Department's rewease of four Bush-era wegaw opinions covering (in graphic and extensive detaiw) de interrogation of 14 high-vawue terror detainees using harsh techniqwes beyond waterboarding. These additionaw techniqwes incwude keeping detainees in a painfuw standing position for wong periods (Used often, once for 180 hours),[229] using a pwastic neck cowwar to swam detainees into wawws, keeping de detainee's ceww cowd for wong periods, beating and kicking de detainee, insects pwaced in a confinement box (de suspect had a fear of insects), sweep-deprivation, prowonged shackwing, and dreats to a detainee's famiwy. One of de memos awso audorized a medod for combining muwtipwe techniqwes.[228][230]

Detaiws from de memos awso incwuded de number of times dat techniqwes such as waterboarding were used. A footnote said dat one detainee was waterboarded 83 times in one monf, whiwe anoder was waterboarded 183 times in a monf.[231][232] This may have gone beyond even what was awwowed by de CIA's own directives, which wimit waterboarding to 12 times a day.[232]
The Fox News website carried reports from an unnamed U.S. officiaw who cwaimed dat dese were de number of pourings, not de number of sessions.[233]

Physicians for Human Rights has accused de Bush administration of conducting iwwegaw human experiments and unedicaw medicaw research during interrogations of suspected terrorists.[234] The group has suggested dis activity was a viowation of de standards set by de Nuremberg Triaws.[235]

The United States maintains a detention center at its miwitary base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba where enemy combatants of de war on terror are hewd. The detention center has been de source of various controversies regarding de wegawity of de center and de treatment of detainees.[236][237]Amnesty Internationaw has cawwed de situation "a human rights scandaw" in a series of reports.[238] 775 detainees have been brought to Guantánamo. Of dese, many have been reweased widout charge. As of January 2017, 45 detainees remain at Guantanamo.[239] The United States assumed territoriaw controw over Guantánamo Bay under de 1903 Cuban–American Treaty of Rewations, which granted de United States a perpetuaw wease of de area.[240] United States, by virtue of its compwete jurisdiction and controw, maintains "de facto" sovereignty over dis territory, whiwe Cuba retained uwtimate sovereignty over de territory. The current government of Cuba regards de U.S. presence in Guantánamo as iwwegaw and insists de Cuban-American Treaty was obtained by dreat of force in viowation of internationaw waw.[241]

In 2005, Amnesty Internationaw expressed awarm at de erosion in civiw wiberties since de 9/11 attacks. According to Amnesty Internationaw:

The Guantánamo Bay detention camp has become a symbow of de United States administration's refusaw to put human rights and de ruwe of waw at de heart of its response to de atrocities of September 11, 2001. It has become synonymous wif de United States executive's pursuit of unfettered power, and has become firmwy associated wif de systematic deniaw of human dignity and resort to cruew, inhuman or degrading treatment dat has marked de U.S.'s detentions and interrogations in de "war on terror".[243]

Amnesty Internationaw awso condemned de Guantánamo faciwity as "... de guwag of our times," which raised heated conversation in de United States. The purported wegaw status of "unwawfuw combatants" in dose nations currentwy howding detainees under dat name has been de subject of criticism by oder nations and internationaw human rights institutions incwuding Human Rights Watch and de Internationaw Committee of de Red Cross. The ICRC, in response to de U.S.-wed miwitary campaign in Afghanistan, pubwished a paper on de subject.[244] HRW cites two sergeants and a captain accusing U.S. troops of torturing prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan, uh-hah-hah-hah.[245]

Foreign nationaws are occasionawwy captured and abducted outside of de United States and transferred to secret US administered detention faciwities, sometimes being hewd incommunicado for periods of monds or years, a process known as extraordinary rendition.

According to The New Yorker, "The most common destinations for rendered suspects are Egypt, Morocco, Syria, and Jordan, aww of which have been cited for human-rights viowations by de State Department, and are known to torture suspects."[254]

In November 2001, Yaser Esam Hamdi, a U.S. citizen, was captured by Afghan Nordern Awwiance forces in Konduz, Afghanistan, amongst hundreds of surrendering Tawiban fighters and was transferred into U.S. custody. The U.S. government awweged dat Hamdi was dere fighting for de Tawiban, whiwe Hamdi, drough his fader, has cwaimed dat he was merewy dere as a rewief worker and was mistakenwy captured. Hamdi was transferred into CIA custody and transferred to de Guantanamo Bay Navaw Base, but when it was discovered dat he was a U.S. citizen, he was transferred to navaw brig in Norfowk, Virginia and den he was transferred brig in Charweston, Souf Carowina. The Bush Administration identified him as an unwawfuw combatant and denied him access to an attorney or de court system, despite his Fiff Amendment right to due process. In 2002 Hamdi's fader fiwed a habeas corpus petition, de Judge ruwed in Hamdi's favor and reqwired he be awwowed a pubwic defender; however, on appeaw de decision was reversed. In 2004, in de case of Hamdi v. Rumsfewd de U.S. Supreme court reversed de dismissaw of a habeas corpus petition and ruwed detainees who are U.S. citizens must have de abiwity to chawwenge deir detention before an impartiaw judge.

In December 2004, Khawid Ew-Masri, a German citizen, was apprehended by Macedonian audorities when travewing to Skopje because his name was simiwar to Khawid aw-Masri, an awweged mentor to de aw-Qaeda Hamburg ceww. After being hewd in a motew in Macedonia for over dree weeks he was transferred to de CIA and extradited to Afghanistan, uh-hah-hah-hah. Whiwe hewd in Afghanistan, Ew-Masri cwaims he was sodomized, beaten, and repeatedwy interrogated about awweged terrorist ties.[255] After being in custody for five monds, Condoweezza Rice wearned of his detention and ordered his rewease. Ew-Masri was reweased at night on a desowate road in Awbania, widout apowogy or funds to return home. He was intercepted by Awbanian guards, who bewieved he was a terrorist due to his haggard and unkept appearance. He was subseqwentwy reunited wif his wife who had returned to her famiwy in Lebanon wif deir chiwdren because she dought her husband had abandoned dem. Using isotope anawysis, scientists at de Bavarian archive for geowogy in Munich anawyzed his hair and verified dat he was mawnourished during his disappearance.[256]

In 2007, U.S. President Bush signed an Executive order banning de use of torture in de CIA's interrogation program.[257]

According to Canadian historian Michaew Ignatieff, during and after de Cowd War, de United States pwaced greater emphasis dan oder nations on human rights as part of its foreign powicy, awarded foreign aid to faciwitate human rights progress, and annuawwy assessed de human rights records of oder nationaw governments.[44]

The U.S. Department of State pubwishes a yearwy report "Supporting Human Rights and Democracy: The U.S. Record" in compwiance wif a 2002 waw dat reqwires de Department to report on actions taken by de U.S. Government to encourage respect for human rights.[261] It awso pubwishes yearwy "Country Reports on Human Rights Practices."[262] In 2006 de United States created a "Human Rights Defenders Fund" and "Freedom Awards."[263] The "Ambassadoriaw Roundtabwe Series", created in 2006, are informaw discussions between newwy confirmed U.S. Ambassadors and human rights and democracy non-governmentaw organizations.[264] The United States awso support democracy and human rights drough severaw oder toows.[265]

In 2006 de award went to Joshua Morris of de embassy in Mauritania who recognized necessary democracy and human rights improvements in Mauritania and made democracy promotion one of his primary responsibiwities. He persuaded de Government of Mauritania to re-open voter registration wists to an additionaw 85,000 citizens, which incwudes a significant number of Afro-Mauritanian minority individuaws. He awso organized and managed de wargest youf-focused democracy project in Mauritania in 5 years.

Nadaniew Jensen of de embassy in Vietnam was runner-up. He successfuwwy advanced de human rights agenda on severaw fronts, incwuding organizing de resumption of a biwateraw Human Rights Diawogue, pushing for de rewease of Vietnam's prisoners of concern, and dedicating himsewf to improving rewigion freedom in nordern Vietnam.[266]

Under wegiswation by congress, de United States decwared dat countries utiwizing chiwd sowdiers may no wonger be ewigibwe for US miwitary assistance, in an attempt to end dis practice.[267]

The US's ratification of de ICCPR was done wif five reservations – or wimits – on de treaty, 5 understandings and 4 decwarations. Among dese is de rejection of sections of de treaty dat prohibit capitaw punishment.[274][275] Incwuded in de Senate's ratification was de decwaration dat "de provisions of Articwe 1 drough 27 of de Covenant are not sewf-executing",[276] and in a Senate Executive Report stated dat de decwaration was meant to "cwarify dat de Covenant wiww not create a private cause of action in U.S. Courts."[277] This way of ratifying de treaty was criticized as incompatibwe wif de Supremacy Cwause by Louis Henkin.[278]

As a reservation dat is "incompatibwe wif de object and purpose" of a treaty is void as a matter of internationaw waw, Vienna Convention on de Law of Treaties, art. 19, 1155 U.N.T.S. 331 (entered into force January 27, 1980) (specifying conditions under which signatory States can offer "reservations"), dere is some issue as to wheder de non-sewf-execution decwaration is even wegaw under domestic waw. At any rate, de United States is but a signatory in name onwy.

The US rejected de Rome Statute after its attempts to incwude de nation of origin as a party in internationaw proceedings faiwed, and after certain reqwests were not met, incwuding recognition of gender issues, "rigorous" qwawifications for judges, viabwe definitions of crimes, protection of nationaw security information dat might be sought by de court, and jurisdiction of de UN Security Counciw to hawt court proceedings in speciaw cases.[279] Since de passage of de statute, de US has activewy encouraged nations around de worwd to sign "biwateraw immunity agreements" prohibiting de surrender of US personnew before de ICC[280] and activewy attempted to undermine de Rome Statute of de Internationaw Criminaw Court.[281] The US Congress awso passed a waw, American Service-Members' Protection Act (ASPA) audorizing de use of miwitary force to free any US personnew dat are brought before de court rader dan its own court system.[282][283] Human Rights Watch criticized de United States for removing itsewf from de Statute.[284]

I dink it is a very backwards step. It is unprecedented which I dink to an extent smacks of pettiness in de sense dat it is not going to affect in any way de estabwishment of de internationaw criminaw court ... The US have reawwy isowated demsewves and are putting demsewves into bed wif de wikes of China, de Yemen and oder undemocratic countries.[284]

Whiwe de US has maintained dat it wiww "bring to justice dose who commit genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes," its primary objections to de Rome Statute have revowved around de issues of jurisdiction and process. A US ambassador for War Crimes Issues to de UN Security Counciw said to de US Senate Foreign Rewations Committee dat because de Rome Statute reqwires onwy one nation to submit to de ICC, and dat dis nation can be de country in which an awweged crime was committed rader dan defendant's country of origin, U.S. miwitary personnew and US foreign peaceworkers in more dan 100 countries couwd be tried in internationaw court widout de consent of de US. The ambassador states dat "most atrocities are committed internawwy and most internaw confwicts are between warring parties of de same nationawity, de worst offenders of internationaw humanitarian waw can choose never to join de treaty and be fuwwy insuwated from its reach absent a Security Counciw referraw. Yet muwtinationaw peacekeeping forces operating in a country dat has joined de treaty can be exposed to de court's jurisdiction even if de country of de individuaw peacekeeper has not joined de treaty."[279]

Where de signature is subject to ratification, acceptance or approvaw, de signature does not estabwish de consent to be bound. However, it is a means of audentication and expresses de wiwwingness of de signatory state to continue de treaty-making process. The signature qwawifies de signatory state to proceed to ratification, acceptance or approvaw. It awso creates an obwigation to refrain, in good faif, from acts dat wouwd defeat de object and de purpose of de treaty.[285]

The U.S. has not ratified de fowwowing internationaw human rights treaties:[269]

Studies have found dat de New York Times coverage of worwdwide human rights viowations is seriouswy biased, predominantwy focusing on de human rights viowations in nations where dere is cwear U.S. invowvement, whiwe having rewativewy wittwe coverage of de human rights viowations in oder nations.[289][290]Amnesty Internationaw's Secretary Generaw Irene Khan expwains, "If we focus on de U.S. it's because we bewieve dat de U.S. is a country whose enormous infwuence and power has to be used constructivewy ... When countries wike de U.S. are seen to undermine or ignore human rights, it sends a very powerfuw message to oders."[291]

According to Freedom in de Worwd, an annuaw report by US based dink-tank Freedom House, which rates powiticaw rights and civiw wiberties, in 2007, de United States was ranked "Free" (de highest possibwe rating), togeder wif 92 oder countries.

The Powity data series, which rate regime and audority characteristics, covering de years 1800-2004, has ranked de United States wif de highest possibwe rating since 1871.[292]

According to de Economist Magazine's Democracy Index (2016), de US ranks 21 out of 167 nations. In 2016 and 2017, de United States is cwassified as a "Fwawed Democracy" by Democracy Index and received a score of 8.24 out of 10.00 wif respect to civiw wiberties.[293] This is de first time de United States has been downgraded from a "Fuww Democracy" to a "Fwawed Democracy" since The Economist began pubwishing de Democracy Index report.[294][295]

According to de annuaw Privacy Internationaw index of 2007, de United States was ranked an "endemic surveiwwance society", scoring onwy 1.5 out of 5 privacy points.[300]

According to de Gawwup Internationaw Miwwennium Survey, de United States ranked 23rd in citizens' perception of human rights observance when its citizens were asked, "In generaw, do you dink dat human rights are being fuwwy respected, partiawwy respected or are dey not being respected at aww in your country?"[301]

^The Universaw Decwaration of Human Rights, supreme waw of internationaw human rights of de United Nations: Articwe 25: 1: Everyone has de right to a standard of wiving adeqwate for de heawf and weww-being of himsewf and of his famiwy, incwuding food, cwoding, housing and medicaw care and necessary sociaw services, and de right to security in de event of unempwoyment, sickness, disabiwity, widowhood, owd age or oder wack of wivewihood in circumstances beyond his controw.

^See, e.g., "Articwe VI". U.S. Constitution. 1787. The Senators and Representative before mentioned, and de Members of de severaw State Legiswatures, and aww executive and judiciaw Officers, bof of de United States and of de severaw States, shaww be bound by Oaf or Affirmation, to support dis Constitution; but no rewigious Test shaww ever be reqwired as a Quawification to any Office or pubwic Trust under de United States.

^Foster v. Neiwson, 27 U.S. 253, 314-15 (1829) U.S. Supreme Court, Chief Justice Marshaww writing: "Our constitution decwares a treaty to be de waw of de wand. It is, conseqwentwy, to be regarded in courts of justice as eqwivawent to an act of de wegiswature, whenever it operates of itsewf widout de aid of any wegiswative provision, uh-hah-hah-hah. But when de terms of de stipuwation import a contract, when eider of de parties engages to perform a particuwar act, de treaty addresses itsewf to de powiticaw, not de judiciaw department, and de wegiswature must execute de contract before it can become a ruwe for de Court." at 314, cited in Martin Internationaw Human Rights and Humanitarian Law et aw.

^Benezet awso stated dat "Liberty is de right of every human creature, as soon as he breades de vitaw air. And no human waw can deprive him of de right which he derives from de waw of nature." Grimm, Robert T., Andony Benezet (1716–1784), Notabwe American Phiwandropists: Biographies of Giving and Vowunteering, Greenwood Pubwishing Group, 2002, ISBN1-57356-340-4, pages 26-28

^ abLieberman, Jedro Kowwer (1999). A practicaw companion to de Constitution: how de Supreme Court has ruwed on issues from abortion to zoning. University of Cawifornia Press. p. 382. ISBN0-520-21280-0.

^Lieberman, Jedro Kowwer, A practicaw companion to de Constitution: how de Supreme Court has ruwed on issues from abortion to zoning, University of Cawifornia Press, 1999, ISBN0-520-21280-0, page 6

^Vienna Convention on de Law of Treaties between States and Internationaw Organizations or between Internationaw Organizations 1986 Articwe 18. [1]"Archived copy". Archived from de originaw on May 11, 2008. Retrieved May 8, 2008.CS1 maint: Archived copy as titwe (wink)

^26. The Committee, whiwe taking note of de various ruwes and reguwations prohibiting discrimination in de provision of disaster rewief and emergency assistance, remains concerned about information dat poor peopwe and in particuwar African-Americans, were disadvantaged by de rescue and evacuation pwans impwemented when Hurricane Katrina hit de United States of America, and continue to be disadvantaged under de reconstruction pwans. (articwes 6 and 26) The State party shouwd review its practices and powicies to ensure de fuww impwementation of its obwigation to protect wife and of de prohibition of discrimination, wheder direct or indirect, as weww as of de United Nations Guiding Principwes on Internaw Dispwacement, in de areas of disaster prevention and preparedness, emergency assistance and rewief measures. In de aftermaf of Hurricane Katrina, it shouwd increase its efforts to ensure dat de rights of poor peopwe and in particuwar African-Americans, are fuwwy taken into consideration in de reconstruction pwans wif regard to access to housing, education and heawf care. The Committee wishes to be informed about de resuwts of de inqwiries into de awweged faiwure to evacuate prisoners at de Parish prison, as weww as de awwegations dat New Orweans residents were not permitted by waw enforcement officiaws to cross de Greater New Orweans Bridge to Gretna, Louisiana. See: "Concwuding Observations of de Human Rights Committee on de Second and Third U.S. Reports to de Committee (2006)". Human Rights Committee. University of Minnesota Human Rights Library. Juwy 28, 2006.